get_token_metadata

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the tool retrieves metadata but lacks behavioral details such as required permissions, rate limits, error handling, or response format. This is inadequate for a read operation with no annotation support.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the purpose and lists key attributes without waste. It's appropriately sized for a straightforward tool with clear parameters.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no annotations and no output schema, the description is minimal but covers the basic purpose. However, it lacks details on behavioral traits and output, making it incomplete for a tool that interacts with blockchain data where context like network defaults or error cases matters.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so parameters are well-documented in the schema. The description doesn't add meaning beyond the schema (e.g., it doesn't explain token address format or blockchain options), resulting in a baseline score of 3 where the schema does the heavy lifting.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('Get') and resource ('token metadata') with specific attributes listed (name, symbol, decimals, total supply). It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'get_token_balance' by focusing on metadata rather than balance, but doesn't explicitly contrast with 'get_solana_token_metadata' which appears to be a blockchain-specific variant.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., valid blockchain/token), exclusions, or comparisons to similar tools like 'get_solana_token_metadata' or 'call_contract_view' for metadata retrieval, leaving usage context unclear.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.